Madras High Court
Reliance General Insurance ... vs Chandhumathi on 23 February, 2022
C.M.A.No.1851 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.02.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
C.M.A.No.1851 of 2016
and C.M.P.No.13561 of 2016
Reliance General Insurance Company Limited
Balmar Lawrie House, No.628
Anna Salai, Chennai -18. ... Appellant
Vs.
1.Chandhumathi
2.Chengama Naidu
3.Prabhavathamma
4.Minor Yasashree
(Rep. By her mother/1st respondent)
5.V.Purushothaman ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 19 of Family Courts
Act against the Judgment and decree dated 27.01.2015 passed in
M.A.C.T.O.P.No.1112 of 2009 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
I Additional District Court, Tiruvallur.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1851 of 2016
For Appellant : Mr.M.Suresh
for K.Moorthy
For Respondent : Mr.N.S.Suganthan
for R1, R3 and R4
R2-No appearance
R5-Notice Served-NA
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.]
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the Judgment and
decree passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 1st Additional District
Court, Tiruvallur, in M.C.O.P.No.1112 of 2009 dated 27.01.2015.
2.Facts in brief:-
One Janakiraman, S/o Chengamma Naidu, died in a motor vehicle accident
which took place on 12.09.2008. His wife, parents and minor daughter
approached the Tribunal, seeking compensation on the ground that the deceased
along with one Ananda Naidu were walking on Chithoor to Puthur Road. At that
time, the driver of the Jeep bearing Registration No.TNI 2045 came in a rash and
negligent manner, hit behind both the pedestrians. In which, the said Janakiraman
died on the spot, while Ananda Naidu sustained grievous injuries. Since the 1 st
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1851 of 2016
respondent is the owner of the offending vehicle and the 2 nd respondent is the
insurer, both are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of
Rs.62,95,000/-
3.The appellant resisted the claim petition by filing a counter in which the
entire allegations and averments made in the claim petition were denied and
disputed.
4.Before the Tribunal on behalf of the claimants 3 witnesses were
examined; 8 documents were marked. The appellant neither examined any
witness nor produced any documents.
5.P.W.2-Ananda Naidu deposed that he was walking along with the
deceased on Chittoor to Puthur road, the Jeep which was proceeding on the same
direction came behind them and hit against both of them. He further stated that he
sustained grievous injuries and he was taken to the hospital and the said
Janakiraman died on the spot. To support the oral evidence of P.W.2, the claimant
marked Ex.P.1- copy of the First Information Report and Ex.P.2-Charge sheet to
show that a criminal case was registered against the driver of the Jeep. As
mentioned above the appellant has not examined any witness to disprove the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1851 of 2016
evidence adduced by the claimants. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly held that the
driver of the offending vehicle caused the accident.
6.Heard, Mr.Suresh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and
Mr.N.S.Suganthan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1,3 and 4.
7.P.W.1 has stated that her deceased husband was working as Secondary
Grade Assistant in Kesari Higher Secondary School at Chennai and he was paid
Rs.13,103/- per month as salary. Ex.P.7 is the service register, which shows that
the deceased was born on 10.08.1974. Thus the deceased died at the age of 34
years. Ex.P.6 is the Salary Certificate, which shows that the Gross salary was
Rs.18,058/-. Though the deceased was a permanent employee and as per the
decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co., Ltd.,
Vs. Pranay Sethi and others the claimants are entitled for 50% for future
prospectus, the Tribunal has ordered only 40% to determine the loss of income.
8.Considering the fact that the deceased have 4 dependants, 1/4th was
deducted for the personal expenses. The Tribunal has fixed the income at
Rs.25,281/- after adding 40% to his salary of Rs.18,058/- and by applying the
multiplier of '16' has awarded Rs.36,40,464/- towards loss of income, in addition,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1851 of 2016
Rs.25,000/- was awarded to the 1st claimant for Consortium and Rs.30,000/- to
the claimants 2 to 4 for loss of love and affection and Rs.10,000/- for funeral
expenses. In total, the tribunal has awarded Rs.37,05,464/- along with interest at
the rate of 7.5% p.a.,.
9.In our view, the award is just and reasonable and hence the award of the
Tribunal passed in M.C.O.P.No.1112 of 2009 dated 27.01.2015 is hereby
confirmed.
10.Thus, the appellant/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the award
amount with accrued interest at the rate of 7.5% and costs, less the amount
already deposited, if any, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order. Interest shall be calculated from the date of claim petition,
till the date of realisation. On such deposit, the major claimants are permitted to
withdraw the award amount, less the amount already withdrawn, if any, together
with proportionate interest and costs. Insofar as the 4th claimant/minor, her share
shall be deposited by the Tribunal in any Fixed Deposit Scheme in any one of the
Nationalised Banks and it shall be renewed periodically till she attains majority
and the interest accrued thereon shall be withdrawn by the first claimant/mother
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1851 of 2016
once in three months. The apportionment of shares as fixed by the Tribunal to the
claimants is hereby confirmed.
11.In the result, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal fails and the same stands
dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[M.K.K.S.,J.] [V.S.G.,J.]
23.02.2022
Jer
Intex : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
To
1. I Additional District Court, Tiruvallur.
2. The Section Officer,
V.R.Section,
Madras High Court, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.1851 of 2016
K.KALYANASUNDARAM, J.
and
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
Jer
JUDGMENT MADE IN
C.M.A.No.1851 of 2016
23.02.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
